Forum for Corporate Communications

DATE:
REPLY TO
ATTN OF:
SUBJECT:
TO:
'~..)
I } . A-,.,b
->f'-' J.j.k
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
memorandum
December 12, 1983
Donald Y. Yamamoto ~
Transcript of Speech
Ambassador Hansfield
Mr . Hugh Hara of USIS was unable to record your speech
before the Forum for Corporate Communications at the
Japan Press Center on November 17th due to a faulty recorder
system . He did manage to get a tape recording from
another source and has come up with the following transcript
which you may wish to edit before it is released .
OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10
(REV. 1-80)
GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101- 11 .6
501()...114
'> GPO : 1981 0 - 3•1-526 ( 7008)
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
AMBASSADOR HANSFIELD ' S PRESENTATION
BEFORE THE FORill1 FOR CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS
TOKYO JAPAN, NOVEMBER ~ ~ 1983
'7
Mr . Willoughby . Mr . President . Corky Alexander. You are an
Honorary Member - - he ' ll do anything to get out of paying dues .
Ladies and gentlemen :
I 'm delighted to have this opportunity to relate to you my
views covering the U .S .-Japan relationship which, as some of
you , I think, is the most important bilateral relationship in
the world , bar none . It is a relationship which has had its
ups and downs since the day Commodore Perry arrived . There
have been tragic years, happy years, solid years .
During the past six years we have had a number of difficult
problems with Japan , and may I say that Japan had the same
problems with us . They centered primarily on the trade factor,
and it is to be anticipated that when you consider the size of
U .S .-Japan trade, in excess of 60 billion dollars a year, that
there are bound to be difficulties from time to time . So far
we have been able to cope with them on an individual basis, but
in recent years as the recession deepened in the United States,
deepened still more in Europe , the pressures on Japan have
increased considerably .
As a matter of fact, if I were to describe what our
difficulties are with Japan, I would say it in three words:
trade, trade and trade .
The defense picture is looking fairly good. The trade picture
could become worse before it gets better. Last year we had a
trade deficit with Japan amounting to 16 .8 billion dollars .
The year before, 1981, it was 15.8 billion dollars, and the
estimates for this year point to 20 billion dollars or more .
He tend to place a little bit too much emphasis, I think, on
our deficiency in this trading relationship by placing too much
emphasis on the deficit with Japan . Hhen we mentioned in 1980
when we had a 9 .9 billion dollar deficit with Japan, we forgot
to mention that in that same year we had about a 21 .5 billion
dollar surplus with Western Europe, and when we talk of the
deficit last year of 16.8 billion dollars, we forget to mention
that the next country to Japan, deficitwise , is Canada where we
had a deficit of about 12 .7 billion dollars.
What I 'm trying to say is that if you look at the trade picture
you want to look at the whole picture and not just at segments
of it . What I'm saying further is that no country should be
made a scapegoat alone because no country alone is responsible
for our difficulties . Our difficulties are in large part of
our own making , and while Japan can, must and should help in
the opening of its markets, the main responsibility is ours
because we were responsible at home for much of the economic
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
difficulties which we have had to confront , and only we can
play the major part in getting ourselves out of the
difficulties which we created .
It is true , as I have said , that Japan must open its markets
because Japan has been the chief beneficiary of the
international trading system. Japan is a super power ,
economically speaking . It is a great power overall because
with economic might comes a certain degree of political
responsibility , and in that respect it would behoove Japan to
give the most serious consideration , as I think it is , to
opening its markets both agriculturally and merchandisewise , so
that other countries can have , in effect , somewhat the same
opportunities in Japan that Japan is given , let us say, in the
United States .
When we look at this trade picture we have to be aware of the
difficulties which confront both our countries . The Japanese
have to contend with a very strong poHer bloc and so do we . We
would like Japan , for example, to remove its tariffs and quotas
on the 13 or 14 agricultural products , including beef and
citrus , and if the Japanese did I think that the J apanese
farmer could live with it , and I think the Japanese consumer
could benefit. Speaking of beef and citrus , i~ is interesting
to note the symbolism of those two products .
If the Japanese were to open their agricultural markets
comletely , including beef and citrus , it is my understanding
that the differential would amount to somewhat between 500-600
million dollars in the trade area . That wouldn't make a dent
in the neficit . But if we would consider seriously-- and this
is where the Congress comes in - - give thought to the shipping
of surplus Alaskan oil and gas to Japan and East Asia , in that
way we could reduce our deficit with Japan by something on the
order of 4 billion dollars . As a matter of fact , I have seen
the figure 6 billion dollars used in Business Heek , but I think
that is a little high .
It could be done so that everyone would benefit and no one
would be hurt . It cost between $5 .50 and $5 .60 a barrel to
ship the crude from Valdez in Alaska, down the West Coast where
the capacity for refineries does not exist , to the Panama
Canal, then either transship it in smaller tankers or through
the pipeline , which I understand is now in operation , put in on
super tankers at the other end , and ship it up to the Gulf
Coast . You could ship a barrel of oil from Mexico for
approximately 50 to 60 cents instead of $5.50 to $5 .60 it costs
to go to the Gulf Coast .
That surplus oil could be shipped to this part of the world in
Japanese bottoms probably at a cost of $1 .0 to $1 .25 a barrel;
but if an agreement could be reached I would hope that a
substantial portion caul~ be carried in American bott oms ,
raising the cost of shipment to about $2 .00 to $2 .25 a ba~rel .
Still a good deal. It would help us in our relations with
- 2
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Japan because it would diversify Japan ' s sources of supply , and
all of you know how much Japan depends upon its energy needs
from outside sources . It would , in a sense , help to repay the
Japanese for the sacrifices they made on our behalf at the time
of the Iranian hostage cricis three years ago . At that time ,
at our r equest , the Japanese r efused to pay the $2.50 a barrel
which t h e Iranians were demanding . Two days later Iran cut off
all i ts oi l shipments t o J apan , and that amounted to 13 percent
of Japan ' s imports . Quite a sacrifice .
As a matter of fact , of all our friends and allies on the
I r anian and Afghanistan crises , no one supported us more
strongly than Japan . And no one paid a higher price in the
process-- an indication of just what this relationship is .
But there are forces in the Congress , not large in numbers but
great i n political clout, and it is my understanding that
something on the order of 240 or so members of the House have
affixed their signatures to legislation which would continue
the present prohibition . That is one of the thi ngs we could do
to reduce our surplus considerably , and no one but us can do
it . That ' s what I mean when I say that ther e are certain
things that only we can do to rectify our own difficulties , and
it would behoove us to look at the motes in our own eyes rather
than to continue to blame someone else for the difficulties
which are pri~arily ours and which will be cured by us to a
large extent if there are to be cures .
I am delighted with the upsurge in the economy in the United
States . I am very happy that in less than a year the
unemployment rate has declined from 10 .8 to 8 .8 percent , but
that is still too high a rate , and as long as it remains high
the p r ess ures will be on the Congress to do something ,
anything , to try and bring about a rectification of that
economic overhead . I was disappointed that the Local Content
Bill passed the House some days ago . It is not good
legislation , to put it mildly . It will keep out investment
rather than bring it in . It will reduce competition , the
mainstay, the backbone , of the private enterprises system which
I believe in . It will increase prices . It will fuel
inflation . And while it might temporarily add a little to the
e~ployment picture , in the long run it would just exacerbate it
that much more . It is my hope that it will not get anywhere 1n
the Senate , and that if it does that the President will veto it .
When we look at the trade picture , we also have to consider
what it means to us in other areas . For example , while our
two-way trade with Japan was something on the order of 63
billion dollars last year , in 1975 our two-way trade with all
of East Asia amounted to just 42 billion dollars . Quite a
change . Last year the figure was in excess of 120 billion
dollars , and for the fourth year in a row it exceeded our trade
with Western Europe whi~h used to be our primary trading
partner.
- 3 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
In Japan we have about 6 .9 billion dollars in direct American
investment. Japan has something on the order of 8 .9 billion
dollars invested in the United States. I personally think the
figure would be closer to 10 billion dollars , and much of that
has come in the past several years .
But the return on the investments in East Asia of American
business is the best, comparatively speaking , of any region in
the world . But out of 227 billion dollars invested by American
business worldwide , only about 26 billion dollars is invested
in East Asia, including Japan . I think , however , that that is
changing. I think the American business community is becoming
aware of just how important this part of the world is , and I
think what we are beginning to see is the culmination of a
trend which started on the day that George ~~shington was
inaugurated as our first president because on that day there-.
were 13 American Clippers in Canton Harbor , and from that time ,
while the pull had al1vays been eastward across the Atlantic
where most of our people came from , the push has always been
westward . First in the old Northwest Territories of Ohio ,
Indiana and Illinois, and then the Hidwest, Texas, the Rocky
Mountains, the Southwest , Clifornia, the Northwest , Alaska ,
Hawaii and the Philippines .
Walt Whitman in the last century summed it up very nicely when ,
in one of his poems he said , "Hestward , ever westward , to
Oregon ." If he were alive today I think he would say,
"\vestward, ever westward , to the Orient" because the trade and
population figures indicate that trends and patterns of that
nature are in effect , and I think they will continue to be in
effect for decades to come .
What I am saying is that it is in the Pacific and East Asia
where we will see things happening in the next century because
the next century , in my opinion, will be the "Century of the
Pacific" , and that huge basin on which four South American
states front, all of Central and North America , Australia , New
Zealand, the islands on the Pacific, all of East Asia and
including Japan , that basin where half the people of the world
live , where there are tremendous resources, great markets and ,
on the whole, friednly peoples and governments , that basin will
be developed on the basis of the strength and durability and
reliability of the Japanese-American relationship . I will
refer to that later .
In the defense picture, there have been allegations from time
to time , diminishing in late years , of the fact that Japan
allegedly spends less than 1 percent of its GNP on defense , and
because of that and the Mutual Security Treaty which we have
with Japan which calls on us to come to the defense of Japan if
Japan is attacked , and we will, that the Japanese have been
able to accomplish an e~onomic miracle. The latter part of the
statement is correct. The Japanese have performed an economic
miracle by rising from the ashes of the Pacific War and
reaching the pinnacle of being the second most i mportant
- 4 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
industrial economy in the \·lest , and before too long, as the
President said l ast week , it will become the second highest
industrial economy i n the world .
But if we l ook at the facts and the figures , and that ' s all
that c ounts and that ' s all that ~1ill bear out in an argument ,
we have to recognize that if the Japanese base their defense
expenditures on the same factors that we and NATO do , which
included pensions and survivors ' benefits which are in the
Welfar e Department , then the figure would be somewhere between
1.5 and 1 .6 percent of their GNP . We would like to see Japan
do more, but only i n its own self defense . We don ' t want Japan
to become a r egional power , neither does Japan , but we would
like to call on ou r friends and allies to take a l ittle more of
the responsibility, a little more of the burden , and give us
the opportunity to be in better shape to carry out the
r esponsi bilities which , for example , are those of the Seventh
Fleet . It does not have enough ships , it has too big an area
to patrol , its area of responsibility cover 70 percent of t he
water surface of the globe and 50 percent of the water and land
surface of the glove . The Pacific , the Indian and even the
Antarctic Oceans are its sphere of responsibility .
We are no longe r the power we used to be in the days following
the Second World War . He face a potential enemy which cannot
be and should not be ignored , and we have to call on our
friends and allies to take up a bigger share of the overall
responsibility so that we can , united be able to show the best
possible front .
When I talk of potential dangers , I have in mind the fact that
the Soviet Union has 48 divisions on the Sino-Soviet border and
3 north of Vladisvostok in the Maritime Province, equivalent to
25 percent of the Soviet ground forces and all first rate and
up to date .
The Soviet Pacific fleet is the biggest and the best of the
four Soviet fleets and it ' s growing faster and becoming better
all the time .
The Soviets have increased their strength in the Northern
Territories - - unquestionably Japanese territory -- from 2 , 000
to somewhere between 10 and 12 , 000 , and they have at least one
squadron of MIGs on one of the islands , and very possibly
more . Everyone knows , of course, that they have at least 108
SS-20s in Siberia . The figure , in my opinion , is much higher ,
and I think that the Japanese remember that some months ago
Gromyko made the statement that if an agreement could be
reached at the INF proceedings in Geneva that the Soviet Union
would transfer some of its SS-20s to the Far East , and if they
did that what would it mean? China , Japan and the Philippines
would become more vulne~able .
The Soviet Union also has been able to penetrate into Southeast
Asia . \fuen the Vietnamese invacted Cambodia , it wasn ' t too long
- 5 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
afterward that the Chinese invaded Vietnam , and when that
happened, the Vietnamese , who had a treaty with the Soviet
Union , called on the Soviet Union for assistance . That
assistance was forthcoming and in the process Soviet ships ,
first intermittently ~ now more steadily , have the use of Cam
Rahn Bay and the airfields adjacent thereto . So it has shown
its power . It is increasing its power . It has achieved
something which it had sought for a long time : access to a base
in South Asia which would give them , in turn, access to the
Indian Ocean and it isn't something that we can just brush off
and expect it to disappear . It is the reality and it must be
kept in mind at all times .
Now, turning to the Mutual Security Treaty which some of our
people have indicated , along with spending less than 1 percent
of its GNP on defense , has allowed Japan to accomplish its
tremendous economic recovery . Under that treaty we have agreed
to come to the defense of Japan if it is attacked and , to
repeat , we will. But , in return , we get the use of bases in
this country , rent free. We are here as the guests of the
government and people of Japan . The Japanese contribute in
excess of 1 billion dollars for the upkeep of approximately
49 , 000 U .S . military personnel in this country . If they did
not make that contribution towards housing , labor cost- sharing
and the like , we would have to do that ourselves . But we are
not here just in the defense of Japan . \k are here in our own
defense as well, and the bases in this country and in the
Philippines form that perimeter .
If we did not have this forward line , and we are out here to
stay , we would have to ask ourselves a couple of question . How
far back would we have to withdraw? How much in the tens of
billions of dollars would it cost us and how effective would
that new line be? Think it over . We've got a bargain and it
1s a treaty that is mutually beneficial .
In the field of agriculture , Japan is far and away our best
trading partner . Last year they bought 5 .6 billion dollars
worth of agricultural produce from us, almost twice as much as
any other country . The year before they bought 6 .8 billion
dollars worth of agricultural products . Last year , even though
the value declined by about a billion dollars , they bought
almost as much in quantity but because of oversupply and
reduced prices , the value was decreased accordingly .
We would like the Japanese to open their agricultural markets
more . We think, as I have said before, that it could be done
without much harm to the Japanese farmer , great benefit to the
Japanese consumer , and would remove a symbolic differential
between our two countries which really doesn ' t mean a great
deal as far as reducing the trade deficit is concerned .
We wish also that in the trade area , apart from agriculture ,
that the Japanese l ikewise would open their markets , and we
think in both areas i t would be in Japan ' s se l f-interest . It
- 6 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
is my belie£ that if the Japanese completely liberalized their
markets - - and I ' m not aovocating that -- that they would still
have a sizeable surpl us in their trade r elationship with us .
But trade i s a b i g factor at home and trade is what makes
Congressmen no things that they probably , in their more lucid
moments , would not even consider . But knowing how the reaction
would be , if the pressures become intense especially as they
come closer to an election , I can understand and I think that
if I were still in the Senate and I were feeling the pressure ,
that I would very likely would be throwing bills and
resolutions into the hopper, too . But that wouldn ' t cure the
problem . It might help me · get reelected hut the problem has to
be gone into on the basis of not looking at one country or one
area to cure our ills , but to recognize that while other
countries can be of help , to repeat , the main responsibility is
ours . I think that this relationship, which is so important~
and means so much to both our countries , has to be nurtured
carefully and has to be given every consideration . We have to
understand each other better , and despite our differences in
language , in cultures , in customs and mores , there can be , and
I think there is in the making , a meeting between the East and
West , a meeting which will be very beneficial to us, to the
Pacific Basin , and to the rest of the world b~cause I think ,
speaking of the Pacific Basin again , that it is in the Pacific
and East Asia where it all is , what it ' s all about and where
our future lies .
Any questions?
QUESTION : Thank you , ~1r . Ambassador , for your very interesting
statement which includes a point you raised many times over in
the last six years , namely that Japan is America ' s best ally .
Sometimes to t his you add , "certainly a better ally than
Europeans ." Could you explain to me how such a statement can
be upheld when you consider that Japan is only investing 1.5
percent of its GNP against 4 to 5 percent in Europe ; when Japan
is hesitant to even use the word "alliance " referring to
America when European countries are full-fledged NATO members;
when Japan refuses to accept nuclear warheads in American ships
docking in Japan -- the warheads theoretically being removed
out at sea , put back in the ships when they leave again ; when
as the Europeans at this time, despite great difficulty accept
cruise missiles . How can you make such statements when you
consider that Japan has an army that can ' t begin to defend the
country while NATO countries have real armies under joint
control who would work with the United States in case of war?
Would you say that the United States has a bargain and Japan
has an ally? Don ' t you think that maybe Japan has an even
bigger bargain than America has now?
AMBASSADOR MANSFIELD : I wouldn ' t agree with you at all. I
think the Japanese have done consistently well over the past 13
years and I would call your attention once again to the trade
figures which I have indicated as they apply to Japan and to
East Asia and what they mean to us and to American investment
- 7 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
in this part of the world . And I would also state for the
record that during the entire decade of the seventies , starting
from a small base , the Japanese increased their defense
expenditures at a rate of 8 percent a year while our NATO
allies were increasing theirs at a rate of 2 .5 percent a year.
Our country was reducing its defense expenditures at a rate of
2 percent a year .
Now it has changed under the Reagan Administration . r~at the
Japanese have done in that respect is inspite of difficulties
which confront them . They have to keep in mind Article Nine
of the Constitution under which they renounce war and the
creation of any kind of an ar~ed force . They had to keep in
mind the attitude of their Asian neighbors , all of whom they
occupied wholly or in part during the Pacific \Var . They have
to keep in mind the anti-militaristic feeling on the part of_
the Japanese people who blame the military for getting them ·
involved in the Pacific War . They have to recognize that they
need a consensus, something to back up anything they pass in
the way of legislation . And we have to recognize that the
Japanese for the past four years have had a deficit coming
somewhere close to one-third of their entire budget and their
internal debt today is approximately 523 billion dollars and it
is estimated that at the end of this year it will be somewhere
around 575 billion dollars
They are doing that because they are taking care of defense at
a rate of almost 8 percent a year , not for f or 10 years but for
13 years .
Those are the circumstances which they have to contend with .
Are they the ones who came up with Article Nine? Not at all .
They were the ones who did , of course , invade other parts of
East Asia and they have had to live with that , but I think that
in the changes occuring , a better feeling of understanding is
developing . They did have to spend this money for that
purpose . They didn ' t have to contribute to the upkeep of U.S .
forces in Japan to the tune of more than a billion dollars for
49 , 000 U.S . military personnel . In Germany where we have
245 , 000 U .S . military personnel , the contribution is roughly
1 .3 billion dollars a year.
I think this is a good relationship . I think it ' s a good
partnership , and I think it's beneficial to both our countries ,
and I think it ' s the most important bilateral relationship i n
the world, bar none.
Q: In an article in the current issue of Foreign Policy
Magazine , two former State Department officials , both of whom
were Japan specialist , found fault with you for , quote echoring
Japanese views unquote and argued that Washington "desperately
needs a centralized lon9-term command and control structure to
coordinate its myriad dealings with Japan and an over- arching
Japan ' s strategy like Austr alia ' s high level Defense ·
Secretar iat ."
- 8 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Would you care to comment on the points raised in this article?
A: Not at all . I would say that it depands on what mirror you
look into as to what one ' s reaction would be . There is an old
saying to the effect that a diplomat is a person sent abroad to
lie for his country . I guess I ' m not a diplomat. Certainly
I'm not a professional diplomat . But I try to operate out here
as I operated in the Senate , and that is to treat other people
as I would like to be treated . Maybe it is referred to as the
Silver Rule of Confucius , in the negative: "Do not do unto
others as you would not have done unto you," or the Golden Rule
as we Christians understand it : "Do unto others as you would
have done unto to ."
But my job is to carry out faithfully , and I do, the directions
of the President and the Secretary of State . My job is to
report honestly back to my government , and if people disagree
with me it's just too bad . Honesty is the best policy .
Q : First, I would like to ask you to comment on the American
political scene . As you understand the Democrats are now
considering its own so-called "industrial" policy . But one
concern is there might be a possibility that the Democrats'
industrial policy would become protectionistic because of the
political commitments . They must help unions and the declining
industries. Do you mind commenting on that point?
A: Frankly , I don't know what we mean when we speak to
industrial policy, and I don't think anybody else in my country
does , either . If it oeans government intervention in the
affairs of business, I am against it, and I think that ' s the
best definition you can find at this time , and it's far from
definite .
\\~at I think we ought to do instead of coming up with slogans,
which might be useful in a campaign year, is to bring about a
better relationship between labor and industry, all too often
adversarial, between industry and government , all too often
adversarial, and I think we all ought to work together and make
the sacrifices necessary if we are going to compete in the
world which confronts us today and which will become more
competitive in the future .
Slogans may win elections but they don ' t necessarily produce
the desired results . I'm sorry I can't give you a definition
for "industrial policy" because I just don't know what they
mean .
Q: I have a few questions for Mr . Ambassador .
A: Maybe one at a time,, please .
Q: The first point is I have been here for a little over a
year , and your statement on the Northern Territories is the
- 9 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
first official U.S . support for Japan ' s claim on the Northern
Territories . Could you please tell me what . . .
A: That is a well established policy of the United States
Government and has been for many years .
Q: lvell , would the U.S . come , for example, to the U.N . and
help Japan and U.N. arrange negotiations with Gromyko?
A: They would leave that matter I think up to the Japanese .
Q: The second thing was the chance of Alaskan oil and gas ,
particularly oil, being exported to Japan . There is a lot of
political pressure in Congress right now . Do you think ,
realistically speaking , trying to look ahead to the future ,
that the chances of Japan relenting more on beef and citrus
will be more likely than the U.S . releasing oil?
A: Yes , I would anticipate -- this is anything but official ,
it is just my personal feeling -- that there is a possibility
for further concessions in the area of beef and citrus . I
could be 100 percent wrong . I have been before . I will be
again .
Despite the fact that the Japanese last year bought 62 .1
percent of all the beef we exported worldwide, high grade , high
priced stuff -- we don ' t ship the cheap stuff out , we bring it
in from Australia and New Zealand - - on citrus the Japanese
have a very big mikan industry of their own, and quite often
they have surpluses . They are good oranges the mikans , but
since I have been out here-- and I'm not taking credit for it
because I don't deserve it - - the imports from the Unites
States have increased from 15 , 000 metric tons a year to
approximately 82 or 83 , 000 tons at the present time . About the
only oranges that come into Japan are from Florida and
California , California primarily . In lemons , part of the
citrus family , California has a lock on the Japanese market ,
and on grapefruit Florida has a lock on the Japanese market . I
would say the figures for citrus overall amount to 52 or 53
percent thereabouts, hut the big factor , of course , is orange
and orange juice . What will be done there as far as
concessions are concerned I can ' t say definitely but , to
repeat , my feeling is that there well may be some liberalizing
in the matter of both orange and orange juice and beef imports .
Q: I asked ... Alaskan oil coming to Japan . ..
A: That is always more difficult because you ' ve got a strong
block in the Congress , and that's where the power is and that ' s
where the changes have to be made , anct the prospects do not
look good .
Q: One final question . A lot of people have said that the
Reagan visit was a masterpiece of choreography . It was like a
Kabuki , it was so smooth . Could you give us .perhaps something
- 10 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
maybe we haven't seen in the newspapers already , anything
concrete which came from this visit, anything perhaps that we
didn't see publicized that may have happened because of
Reatan ' s visit besides good kimochi(feelings)?
A: I think that the Reagan visit was a success both
ceremonially and substantially . Every subject practically,
except beef and citrus , and I missed a couple of meetings , may
have been discussed there, but the other subjects were
discussed, between reasonable people , with good arguments , and
with sufficient emphasis .
There have also been agreements to set up a group to study the
question of the yen- dollar differential . Incidentally, I think
it might be well to state here that despite some reports or
some allegations made that the Japanese have been monkeying the
yen , we have found no evidence to that effect , and it isn't
just a yen-dollar differential . It isn't just the yen that the
dollar is strong against because the dollar is strong against
all currencies . But at least from the yen-dollar angle an
agreement has been reached to set up a committee under Vice
President George Bush to look into this matter and see what can
be done to bring about an alleviation of the situation which is
pricing us out of overseas markets and making imports much
easier at lesser prices .
So I think that overall it was a good , very worthwhile
meeting . I think the President indicated an increased· interest
in Asia , and as far as George Shultz is concerned I think he is
the best Secretary of State we've had as far as this part of
the world is concerned, and if you need any proof I think you
need just refer to his speech at the time of the Habib farewell
dinner in San Francisco some months ago and the speech he made
at the Shimada Conference held in Virginia on September 3rd .
So there is a renewed interest, a reawakening of interest or a
continuing of interest, depending how you look at it , on our
part towards this part of the globe .
0 : The Philippines. If Marcos falls and U.S . forces are
forced out of the Philippines , in your opinion how will this
impact on Japan's current share of the defense responsibility
for the Pacific Basin?
A: Sorry, I just can't answer your question . For one thing,
the Philippines is outside my area of responsibility .
Secondly , I cannot read the minds of those who are charged with
the answer to the question which you have raised .
0 : I'm not a journalist so this will probably be a couple of
easy ones . At an age when most men would retire as you did
from the U.S . Senate, you decided to become an ambassador , so
I'm kind of curious ...
A: Somebody asked me .
- ll -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Q: ... as to why you did , and when you came over to this part
of the world what has been , if you will , your most interesting
experiences and new revelations?
A: Well , I don ' t think I would have accepted any other
ambassadorial appointment-- my mind wasn ' t running in that
direction . No other appointment except to Japan because I have
had an intense personal interest in this part of the world
since I first came out with the Marines in the twenties and
served as a private in the Philippines and China , mostly in the
Philippines. It ' s an interest which , when the girl who was
later to become my wife became interested in me and found out
that I hadn ' t even finished the eighth grade , she made me go to
school to make up high school units which I lacked because I
had never gone to high school , and then to enter the School of
Mines in Butte, her home town where I was working in the mine~
at the time , as a special student . A year there was enough
because the Mining School was a little bit too tough for me and
I transferred to the University of Missoula , but I concentrated
on history , especially on the history of the Far East, and when
I finished at the university I was taken on as a professor and
I taught Far Eastern history .
When I went to the Congress and the House I was appointed ,
luckily, in my first year to the Foreign Affairs Committee, and
when I went to the Senate I was appointed , again luckily , in my
first year to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee , and in
both those committees my major area of interest was this part
of the world because I was captivated by what I had seen out
her e . I was interested in what was developing . I thought I
could see the potential , and that ' s the reason I came to
Japan . It has been a very i nteresting experience . It has been
difficult at times . I learned a lot . I have done a lot to
learn , but I want to say that I firmly believe in this
relationship, and I want to do what I can to accommodate , to
compromise , to find solutions to our difficulties because not
only does the future of the Pacific Basin depend upon this
relationship but other parts of the world as well . It's too
important to ignore , and we'd better pay attention to it in our
own self interest , and I speak for both countires .
Q: My second question is, that we as member of FCC sincerely
thank you for coming . As you may have noticed there are many
of us who are \vestern and many of us who are Japanese . \ve all
work in communications, and I think for better or for worse we
all enjoy being here or we shoulc'ln' t in fact be here . \Vhat
specific thing would you or could you recommend to us as
international communicators that we can do to assist in
building this relationship?
A: Tell the truth as you know it . That ' s all .
Q: Mr . Ambassador , I would like to ask you a question as a
historian since before you r etired you put out a very wonderfu l
report which became a book and was sold thr ough Tuttle which
- 12 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
became the basis I think of one of your concepts of what is
happening out here. As a historian , listening to you today and
the underlying overtone of what you are saying , if you put it
all together, what is that it is that seeos to concern you -­off
the record? Is it because you are seeing some parallel in
history over the last 10 years which we were battling in terms
of trade, or over the last 50 years , or is it something else?
Could you tell me?
A : What I have been impressed by is the emotions which have
shown themselves at horne and the feeling with which they have
been expressed . I want to see the relations between our two
countries based on equality . I want to see better
understanding develop . I want to see both countries stand up
on their hind legs when they are in the right and express their
point of view, and I want mutual understanding , honest
understanding, to develop on the part of both nations so that
we can arrive at reasonable conclusions to difficulties and get
away from blaming the other fellow for everything and ignoring
what is the responsibility of each of us . There are things we
have to do at home -- better labor-business-governDent
relationship. There are things we have to do at home in the
matter of greater productivity, better quality goods, more
coDpetitive pricing, follow-through servicing . There are
things which the Japanese have to do, I think, in their own
self interest -- open their markets more , reduce or abolish
some of the quotas and tariffs on agricultural products , try
and keep this international trading system which has been so
good to Japan and not at all bad to the United States in
operation because if some degree of order is not maintained
disorder will occur, chaos will result and all of us will be
the losers .
Q : This may be a little outside your line of work . I have
been doing a lot of thinking and a little writing about the
status of women in Japan . You have been following trends in
Japanese society for many more years than I so could you please
share some of your observations about Japanese women?
A: Well , I never interfere in the domestic affairs of another
country . I do think the status of women in Japan is improving ,
and I am sorry that the ERA didn't pass the House yesterday.
Q : Mr . Ambassador , a short question. Just tell me why only a
very small percentage of Manhattan people know the name of our
prime minister .
A: All I can say is that Japan is not only the nation with the
highest longevity but it's also the nation with the highest
literacy rate.
Q: I have been accorded the honor of having the last question
of the evening according to our Program Chairman . As a person
whose job is to read reports from some of the most
authoritative and best informed people in the United States
- 13 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Government , I would just like to ask you who are the reporters
that you consider to be the best , the most authoritative and
the most understanding on the Far Eastern situation in the
United States media?
A: All of them .
* * *
- 14 -
. '
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

Copyright to this collection is held by the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Library, University of Montana-Missoula. For further information regarding use of the items in this collection, please contact Archives and Special Collections: (406) 243-2053 / library.archives@umontana.edu

For additional information about the collections held by the Archives and Special Collections at the University of Montana--Missoula, please visit the web site: http://www.lib.umt.edu/asc. To suggest a keyword or share what you might know about this item, email: library.archives@umontana.edu.

Transcript

DATE:
REPLY TO
ATTN OF:
SUBJECT:
TO:
'~..)
I } . A-,.,b
->f'-' J.j.k
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
memorandum
December 12, 1983
Donald Y. Yamamoto ~
Transcript of Speech
Ambassador Hansfield
Mr . Hugh Hara of USIS was unable to record your speech
before the Forum for Corporate Communications at the
Japan Press Center on November 17th due to a faulty recorder
system . He did manage to get a tape recording from
another source and has come up with the following transcript
which you may wish to edit before it is released .
OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10
(REV. 1-80)
GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101- 11 .6
501()...114
'> GPO : 1981 0 - 3•1-526 ( 7008)
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
AMBASSADOR HANSFIELD ' S PRESENTATION
BEFORE THE FORill1 FOR CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS
TOKYO JAPAN, NOVEMBER ~ ~ 1983
'7
Mr . Willoughby . Mr . President . Corky Alexander. You are an
Honorary Member - - he ' ll do anything to get out of paying dues .
Ladies and gentlemen :
I 'm delighted to have this opportunity to relate to you my
views covering the U .S .-Japan relationship which, as some of
you , I think, is the most important bilateral relationship in
the world , bar none . It is a relationship which has had its
ups and downs since the day Commodore Perry arrived . There
have been tragic years, happy years, solid years .
During the past six years we have had a number of difficult
problems with Japan , and may I say that Japan had the same
problems with us . They centered primarily on the trade factor,
and it is to be anticipated that when you consider the size of
U .S .-Japan trade, in excess of 60 billion dollars a year, that
there are bound to be difficulties from time to time . So far
we have been able to cope with them on an individual basis, but
in recent years as the recession deepened in the United States,
deepened still more in Europe , the pressures on Japan have
increased considerably .
As a matter of fact, if I were to describe what our
difficulties are with Japan, I would say it in three words:
trade, trade and trade .
The defense picture is looking fairly good. The trade picture
could become worse before it gets better. Last year we had a
trade deficit with Japan amounting to 16 .8 billion dollars .
The year before, 1981, it was 15.8 billion dollars, and the
estimates for this year point to 20 billion dollars or more .
He tend to place a little bit too much emphasis, I think, on
our deficiency in this trading relationship by placing too much
emphasis on the deficit with Japan . Hhen we mentioned in 1980
when we had a 9 .9 billion dollar deficit with Japan, we forgot
to mention that in that same year we had about a 21 .5 billion
dollar surplus with Western Europe, and when we talk of the
deficit last year of 16.8 billion dollars, we forget to mention
that the next country to Japan, deficitwise , is Canada where we
had a deficit of about 12 .7 billion dollars.
What I 'm trying to say is that if you look at the trade picture
you want to look at the whole picture and not just at segments
of it . What I'm saying further is that no country should be
made a scapegoat alone because no country alone is responsible
for our difficulties . Our difficulties are in large part of
our own making , and while Japan can, must and should help in
the opening of its markets, the main responsibility is ours
because we were responsible at home for much of the economic
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
difficulties which we have had to confront , and only we can
play the major part in getting ourselves out of the
difficulties which we created .
It is true , as I have said , that Japan must open its markets
because Japan has been the chief beneficiary of the
international trading system. Japan is a super power ,
economically speaking . It is a great power overall because
with economic might comes a certain degree of political
responsibility , and in that respect it would behoove Japan to
give the most serious consideration , as I think it is , to
opening its markets both agriculturally and merchandisewise , so
that other countries can have , in effect , somewhat the same
opportunities in Japan that Japan is given , let us say, in the
United States .
When we look at this trade picture we have to be aware of the
difficulties which confront both our countries . The Japanese
have to contend with a very strong poHer bloc and so do we . We
would like Japan , for example, to remove its tariffs and quotas
on the 13 or 14 agricultural products , including beef and
citrus , and if the Japanese did I think that the J apanese
farmer could live with it , and I think the Japanese consumer
could benefit. Speaking of beef and citrus , i~ is interesting
to note the symbolism of those two products .
If the Japanese were to open their agricultural markets
comletely , including beef and citrus , it is my understanding
that the differential would amount to somewhat between 500-600
million dollars in the trade area . That wouldn't make a dent
in the neficit . But if we would consider seriously-- and this
is where the Congress comes in - - give thought to the shipping
of surplus Alaskan oil and gas to Japan and East Asia , in that
way we could reduce our deficit with Japan by something on the
order of 4 billion dollars . As a matter of fact , I have seen
the figure 6 billion dollars used in Business Heek , but I think
that is a little high .
It could be done so that everyone would benefit and no one
would be hurt . It cost between $5 .50 and $5 .60 a barrel to
ship the crude from Valdez in Alaska, down the West Coast where
the capacity for refineries does not exist , to the Panama
Canal, then either transship it in smaller tankers or through
the pipeline , which I understand is now in operation , put in on
super tankers at the other end , and ship it up to the Gulf
Coast . You could ship a barrel of oil from Mexico for
approximately 50 to 60 cents instead of $5.50 to $5 .60 it costs
to go to the Gulf Coast .
That surplus oil could be shipped to this part of the world in
Japanese bottoms probably at a cost of $1 .0 to $1 .25 a barrel;
but if an agreement could be reached I would hope that a
substantial portion caul~ be carried in American bott oms ,
raising the cost of shipment to about $2 .00 to $2 .25 a ba~rel .
Still a good deal. It would help us in our relations with
- 2
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Japan because it would diversify Japan ' s sources of supply , and
all of you know how much Japan depends upon its energy needs
from outside sources . It would , in a sense , help to repay the
Japanese for the sacrifices they made on our behalf at the time
of the Iranian hostage cricis three years ago . At that time ,
at our r equest , the Japanese r efused to pay the $2.50 a barrel
which t h e Iranians were demanding . Two days later Iran cut off
all i ts oi l shipments t o J apan , and that amounted to 13 percent
of Japan ' s imports . Quite a sacrifice .
As a matter of fact , of all our friends and allies on the
I r anian and Afghanistan crises , no one supported us more
strongly than Japan . And no one paid a higher price in the
process-- an indication of just what this relationship is .
But there are forces in the Congress , not large in numbers but
great i n political clout, and it is my understanding that
something on the order of 240 or so members of the House have
affixed their signatures to legislation which would continue
the present prohibition . That is one of the thi ngs we could do
to reduce our surplus considerably , and no one but us can do
it . That ' s what I mean when I say that ther e are certain
things that only we can do to rectify our own difficulties , and
it would behoove us to look at the motes in our own eyes rather
than to continue to blame someone else for the difficulties
which are pri~arily ours and which will be cured by us to a
large extent if there are to be cures .
I am delighted with the upsurge in the economy in the United
States . I am very happy that in less than a year the
unemployment rate has declined from 10 .8 to 8 .8 percent , but
that is still too high a rate , and as long as it remains high
the p r ess ures will be on the Congress to do something ,
anything , to try and bring about a rectification of that
economic overhead . I was disappointed that the Local Content
Bill passed the House some days ago . It is not good
legislation , to put it mildly . It will keep out investment
rather than bring it in . It will reduce competition , the
mainstay, the backbone , of the private enterprises system which
I believe in . It will increase prices . It will fuel
inflation . And while it might temporarily add a little to the
e~ployment picture , in the long run it would just exacerbate it
that much more . It is my hope that it will not get anywhere 1n
the Senate , and that if it does that the President will veto it .
When we look at the trade picture , we also have to consider
what it means to us in other areas . For example , while our
two-way trade with Japan was something on the order of 63
billion dollars last year , in 1975 our two-way trade with all
of East Asia amounted to just 42 billion dollars . Quite a
change . Last year the figure was in excess of 120 billion
dollars , and for the fourth year in a row it exceeded our trade
with Western Europe whi~h used to be our primary trading
partner.
- 3 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
In Japan we have about 6 .9 billion dollars in direct American
investment. Japan has something on the order of 8 .9 billion
dollars invested in the United States. I personally think the
figure would be closer to 10 billion dollars , and much of that
has come in the past several years .
But the return on the investments in East Asia of American
business is the best, comparatively speaking , of any region in
the world . But out of 227 billion dollars invested by American
business worldwide , only about 26 billion dollars is invested
in East Asia, including Japan . I think , however , that that is
changing. I think the American business community is becoming
aware of just how important this part of the world is , and I
think what we are beginning to see is the culmination of a
trend which started on the day that George ~~shington was
inaugurated as our first president because on that day there-.
were 13 American Clippers in Canton Harbor , and from that time ,
while the pull had al1vays been eastward across the Atlantic
where most of our people came from , the push has always been
westward . First in the old Northwest Territories of Ohio ,
Indiana and Illinois, and then the Hidwest, Texas, the Rocky
Mountains, the Southwest , Clifornia, the Northwest , Alaska ,
Hawaii and the Philippines .
Walt Whitman in the last century summed it up very nicely when ,
in one of his poems he said , "Hestward , ever westward , to
Oregon ." If he were alive today I think he would say,
"\vestward, ever westward , to the Orient" because the trade and
population figures indicate that trends and patterns of that
nature are in effect , and I think they will continue to be in
effect for decades to come .
What I am saying is that it is in the Pacific and East Asia
where we will see things happening in the next century because
the next century , in my opinion, will be the "Century of the
Pacific" , and that huge basin on which four South American
states front, all of Central and North America , Australia , New
Zealand, the islands on the Pacific, all of East Asia and
including Japan , that basin where half the people of the world
live , where there are tremendous resources, great markets and ,
on the whole, friednly peoples and governments , that basin will
be developed on the basis of the strength and durability and
reliability of the Japanese-American relationship . I will
refer to that later .
In the defense picture, there have been allegations from time
to time , diminishing in late years , of the fact that Japan
allegedly spends less than 1 percent of its GNP on defense , and
because of that and the Mutual Security Treaty which we have
with Japan which calls on us to come to the defense of Japan if
Japan is attacked , and we will, that the Japanese have been
able to accomplish an e~onomic miracle. The latter part of the
statement is correct. The Japanese have performed an economic
miracle by rising from the ashes of the Pacific War and
reaching the pinnacle of being the second most i mportant
- 4 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
industrial economy in the \·lest , and before too long, as the
President said l ast week , it will become the second highest
industrial economy i n the world .
But if we l ook at the facts and the figures , and that ' s all
that c ounts and that ' s all that ~1ill bear out in an argument ,
we have to recognize that if the Japanese base their defense
expenditures on the same factors that we and NATO do , which
included pensions and survivors ' benefits which are in the
Welfar e Department , then the figure would be somewhere between
1.5 and 1 .6 percent of their GNP . We would like to see Japan
do more, but only i n its own self defense . We don ' t want Japan
to become a r egional power , neither does Japan , but we would
like to call on ou r friends and allies to take a l ittle more of
the responsibility, a little more of the burden , and give us
the opportunity to be in better shape to carry out the
r esponsi bilities which , for example , are those of the Seventh
Fleet . It does not have enough ships , it has too big an area
to patrol , its area of responsibility cover 70 percent of t he
water surface of the globe and 50 percent of the water and land
surface of the glove . The Pacific , the Indian and even the
Antarctic Oceans are its sphere of responsibility .
We are no longe r the power we used to be in the days following
the Second World War . He face a potential enemy which cannot
be and should not be ignored , and we have to call on our
friends and allies to take up a bigger share of the overall
responsibility so that we can , united be able to show the best
possible front .
When I talk of potential dangers , I have in mind the fact that
the Soviet Union has 48 divisions on the Sino-Soviet border and
3 north of Vladisvostok in the Maritime Province, equivalent to
25 percent of the Soviet ground forces and all first rate and
up to date .
The Soviet Pacific fleet is the biggest and the best of the
four Soviet fleets and it ' s growing faster and becoming better
all the time .
The Soviets have increased their strength in the Northern
Territories - - unquestionably Japanese territory -- from 2 , 000
to somewhere between 10 and 12 , 000 , and they have at least one
squadron of MIGs on one of the islands , and very possibly
more . Everyone knows , of course, that they have at least 108
SS-20s in Siberia . The figure , in my opinion , is much higher ,
and I think that the Japanese remember that some months ago
Gromyko made the statement that if an agreement could be
reached at the INF proceedings in Geneva that the Soviet Union
would transfer some of its SS-20s to the Far East , and if they
did that what would it mean? China , Japan and the Philippines
would become more vulne~able .
The Soviet Union also has been able to penetrate into Southeast
Asia . \fuen the Vietnamese invacted Cambodia , it wasn ' t too long
- 5 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
afterward that the Chinese invaded Vietnam , and when that
happened, the Vietnamese , who had a treaty with the Soviet
Union , called on the Soviet Union for assistance . That
assistance was forthcoming and in the process Soviet ships ,
first intermittently ~ now more steadily , have the use of Cam
Rahn Bay and the airfields adjacent thereto . So it has shown
its power . It is increasing its power . It has achieved
something which it had sought for a long time : access to a base
in South Asia which would give them , in turn, access to the
Indian Ocean and it isn't something that we can just brush off
and expect it to disappear . It is the reality and it must be
kept in mind at all times .
Now, turning to the Mutual Security Treaty which some of our
people have indicated , along with spending less than 1 percent
of its GNP on defense , has allowed Japan to accomplish its
tremendous economic recovery . Under that treaty we have agreed
to come to the defense of Japan if it is attacked and , to
repeat , we will. But , in return , we get the use of bases in
this country , rent free. We are here as the guests of the
government and people of Japan . The Japanese contribute in
excess of 1 billion dollars for the upkeep of approximately
49 , 000 U .S . military personnel in this country . If they did
not make that contribution towards housing , labor cost- sharing
and the like , we would have to do that ourselves . But we are
not here just in the defense of Japan . \k are here in our own
defense as well, and the bases in this country and in the
Philippines form that perimeter .
If we did not have this forward line , and we are out here to
stay , we would have to ask ourselves a couple of question . How
far back would we have to withdraw? How much in the tens of
billions of dollars would it cost us and how effective would
that new line be? Think it over . We've got a bargain and it
1s a treaty that is mutually beneficial .
In the field of agriculture , Japan is far and away our best
trading partner . Last year they bought 5 .6 billion dollars
worth of agricultural produce from us, almost twice as much as
any other country . The year before they bought 6 .8 billion
dollars worth of agricultural products . Last year , even though
the value declined by about a billion dollars , they bought
almost as much in quantity but because of oversupply and
reduced prices , the value was decreased accordingly .
We would like the Japanese to open their agricultural markets
more . We think, as I have said before, that it could be done
without much harm to the Japanese farmer , great benefit to the
Japanese consumer , and would remove a symbolic differential
between our two countries which really doesn ' t mean a great
deal as far as reducing the trade deficit is concerned .
We wish also that in the trade area , apart from agriculture ,
that the Japanese l ikewise would open their markets , and we
think in both areas i t would be in Japan ' s se l f-interest . It
- 6 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
is my belie£ that if the Japanese completely liberalized their
markets - - and I ' m not aovocating that -- that they would still
have a sizeable surpl us in their trade r elationship with us .
But trade i s a b i g factor at home and trade is what makes
Congressmen no things that they probably , in their more lucid
moments , would not even consider . But knowing how the reaction
would be , if the pressures become intense especially as they
come closer to an election , I can understand and I think that
if I were still in the Senate and I were feeling the pressure ,
that I would very likely would be throwing bills and
resolutions into the hopper, too . But that wouldn ' t cure the
problem . It might help me · get reelected hut the problem has to
be gone into on the basis of not looking at one country or one
area to cure our ills , but to recognize that while other
countries can be of help , to repeat , the main responsibility is
ours . I think that this relationship, which is so important~
and means so much to both our countries , has to be nurtured
carefully and has to be given every consideration . We have to
understand each other better , and despite our differences in
language , in cultures , in customs and mores , there can be , and
I think there is in the making , a meeting between the East and
West , a meeting which will be very beneficial to us, to the
Pacific Basin , and to the rest of the world b~cause I think ,
speaking of the Pacific Basin again , that it is in the Pacific
and East Asia where it all is , what it ' s all about and where
our future lies .
Any questions?
QUESTION : Thank you , ~1r . Ambassador , for your very interesting
statement which includes a point you raised many times over in
the last six years , namely that Japan is America ' s best ally .
Sometimes to t his you add , "certainly a better ally than
Europeans ." Could you explain to me how such a statement can
be upheld when you consider that Japan is only investing 1.5
percent of its GNP against 4 to 5 percent in Europe ; when Japan
is hesitant to even use the word "alliance " referring to
America when European countries are full-fledged NATO members;
when Japan refuses to accept nuclear warheads in American ships
docking in Japan -- the warheads theoretically being removed
out at sea , put back in the ships when they leave again ; when
as the Europeans at this time, despite great difficulty accept
cruise missiles . How can you make such statements when you
consider that Japan has an army that can ' t begin to defend the
country while NATO countries have real armies under joint
control who would work with the United States in case of war?
Would you say that the United States has a bargain and Japan
has an ally? Don ' t you think that maybe Japan has an even
bigger bargain than America has now?
AMBASSADOR MANSFIELD : I wouldn ' t agree with you at all. I
think the Japanese have done consistently well over the past 13
years and I would call your attention once again to the trade
figures which I have indicated as they apply to Japan and to
East Asia and what they mean to us and to American investment
- 7 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
in this part of the world . And I would also state for the
record that during the entire decade of the seventies , starting
from a small base , the Japanese increased their defense
expenditures at a rate of 8 percent a year while our NATO
allies were increasing theirs at a rate of 2 .5 percent a year.
Our country was reducing its defense expenditures at a rate of
2 percent a year .
Now it has changed under the Reagan Administration . r~at the
Japanese have done in that respect is inspite of difficulties
which confront them . They have to keep in mind Article Nine
of the Constitution under which they renounce war and the
creation of any kind of an ar~ed force . They had to keep in
mind the attitude of their Asian neighbors , all of whom they
occupied wholly or in part during the Pacific \Var . They have
to keep in mind the anti-militaristic feeling on the part of_
the Japanese people who blame the military for getting them ·
involved in the Pacific War . They have to recognize that they
need a consensus, something to back up anything they pass in
the way of legislation . And we have to recognize that the
Japanese for the past four years have had a deficit coming
somewhere close to one-third of their entire budget and their
internal debt today is approximately 523 billion dollars and it
is estimated that at the end of this year it will be somewhere
around 575 billion dollars
They are doing that because they are taking care of defense at
a rate of almost 8 percent a year , not for f or 10 years but for
13 years .
Those are the circumstances which they have to contend with .
Are they the ones who came up with Article Nine? Not at all .
They were the ones who did , of course , invade other parts of
East Asia and they have had to live with that , but I think that
in the changes occuring , a better feeling of understanding is
developing . They did have to spend this money for that
purpose . They didn ' t have to contribute to the upkeep of U.S .
forces in Japan to the tune of more than a billion dollars for
49 , 000 U.S . military personnel . In Germany where we have
245 , 000 U .S . military personnel , the contribution is roughly
1 .3 billion dollars a year.
I think this is a good relationship . I think it ' s a good
partnership , and I think it's beneficial to both our countries ,
and I think it ' s the most important bilateral relationship i n
the world, bar none.
Q: In an article in the current issue of Foreign Policy
Magazine , two former State Department officials , both of whom
were Japan specialist , found fault with you for , quote echoring
Japanese views unquote and argued that Washington "desperately
needs a centralized lon9-term command and control structure to
coordinate its myriad dealings with Japan and an over- arching
Japan ' s strategy like Austr alia ' s high level Defense ·
Secretar iat ."
- 8 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Would you care to comment on the points raised in this article?
A: Not at all . I would say that it depands on what mirror you
look into as to what one ' s reaction would be . There is an old
saying to the effect that a diplomat is a person sent abroad to
lie for his country . I guess I ' m not a diplomat. Certainly
I'm not a professional diplomat . But I try to operate out here
as I operated in the Senate , and that is to treat other people
as I would like to be treated . Maybe it is referred to as the
Silver Rule of Confucius , in the negative: "Do not do unto
others as you would not have done unto you" or the Golden Rule
as we Christians understand it : "Do unto others as you would
have done unto to ."
But my job is to carry out faithfully , and I do, the directions
of the President and the Secretary of State . My job is to
report honestly back to my government , and if people disagree
with me it's just too bad . Honesty is the best policy .
Q : First, I would like to ask you to comment on the American
political scene . As you understand the Democrats are now
considering its own so-called "industrial" policy . But one
concern is there might be a possibility that the Democrats'
industrial policy would become protectionistic because of the
political commitments . They must help unions and the declining
industries. Do you mind commenting on that point?
A: Frankly , I don't know what we mean when we speak to
industrial policy, and I don't think anybody else in my country
does , either . If it oeans government intervention in the
affairs of business, I am against it, and I think that ' s the
best definition you can find at this time , and it's far from
definite .
\\~at I think we ought to do instead of coming up with slogans,
which might be useful in a campaign year, is to bring about a
better relationship between labor and industry, all too often
adversarial, between industry and government , all too often
adversarial, and I think we all ought to work together and make
the sacrifices necessary if we are going to compete in the
world which confronts us today and which will become more
competitive in the future .
Slogans may win elections but they don ' t necessarily produce
the desired results . I'm sorry I can't give you a definition
for "industrial policy" because I just don't know what they
mean .
Q: I have a few questions for Mr . Ambassador .
A: Maybe one at a time,, please .
Q: The first point is I have been here for a little over a
year , and your statement on the Northern Territories is the
- 9 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
first official U.S . support for Japan ' s claim on the Northern
Territories . Could you please tell me what . . .
A: That is a well established policy of the United States
Government and has been for many years .
Q: lvell , would the U.S . come , for example, to the U.N . and
help Japan and U.N. arrange negotiations with Gromyko?
A: They would leave that matter I think up to the Japanese .
Q: The second thing was the chance of Alaskan oil and gas ,
particularly oil, being exported to Japan . There is a lot of
political pressure in Congress right now . Do you think ,
realistically speaking , trying to look ahead to the future ,
that the chances of Japan relenting more on beef and citrus
will be more likely than the U.S . releasing oil?
A: Yes , I would anticipate -- this is anything but official ,
it is just my personal feeling -- that there is a possibility
for further concessions in the area of beef and citrus . I
could be 100 percent wrong . I have been before . I will be
again .
Despite the fact that the Japanese last year bought 62 .1
percent of all the beef we exported worldwide, high grade , high
priced stuff -- we don ' t ship the cheap stuff out , we bring it
in from Australia and New Zealand - - on citrus the Japanese
have a very big mikan industry of their own, and quite often
they have surpluses . They are good oranges the mikans , but
since I have been out here-- and I'm not taking credit for it
because I don't deserve it - - the imports from the Unites
States have increased from 15 , 000 metric tons a year to
approximately 82 or 83 , 000 tons at the present time . About the
only oranges that come into Japan are from Florida and
California , California primarily . In lemons , part of the
citrus family , California has a lock on the Japanese market ,
and on grapefruit Florida has a lock on the Japanese market . I
would say the figures for citrus overall amount to 52 or 53
percent thereabouts, hut the big factor , of course , is orange
and orange juice . What will be done there as far as
concessions are concerned I can ' t say definitely but , to
repeat , my feeling is that there well may be some liberalizing
in the matter of both orange and orange juice and beef imports .
Q: I asked ... Alaskan oil coming to Japan . ..
A: That is always more difficult because you ' ve got a strong
block in the Congress , and that's where the power is and that ' s
where the changes have to be made , anct the prospects do not
look good .
Q: One final question . A lot of people have said that the
Reagan visit was a masterpiece of choreography . It was like a
Kabuki , it was so smooth . Could you give us .perhaps something
- 10 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
maybe we haven't seen in the newspapers already , anything
concrete which came from this visit, anything perhaps that we
didn't see publicized that may have happened because of
Reatan ' s visit besides good kimochi(feelings)?
A: I think that the Reagan visit was a success both
ceremonially and substantially . Every subject practically,
except beef and citrus , and I missed a couple of meetings , may
have been discussed there, but the other subjects were
discussed, between reasonable people , with good arguments , and
with sufficient emphasis .
There have also been agreements to set up a group to study the
question of the yen- dollar differential . Incidentally, I think
it might be well to state here that despite some reports or
some allegations made that the Japanese have been monkeying the
yen , we have found no evidence to that effect , and it isn't
just a yen-dollar differential . It isn't just the yen that the
dollar is strong against because the dollar is strong against
all currencies . But at least from the yen-dollar angle an
agreement has been reached to set up a committee under Vice
President George Bush to look into this matter and see what can
be done to bring about an alleviation of the situation which is
pricing us out of overseas markets and making imports much
easier at lesser prices .
So I think that overall it was a good , very worthwhile
meeting . I think the President indicated an increased· interest
in Asia , and as far as George Shultz is concerned I think he is
the best Secretary of State we've had as far as this part of
the world is concerned, and if you need any proof I think you
need just refer to his speech at the time of the Habib farewell
dinner in San Francisco some months ago and the speech he made
at the Shimada Conference held in Virginia on September 3rd .
So there is a renewed interest, a reawakening of interest or a
continuing of interest, depending how you look at it , on our
part towards this part of the globe .
0 : The Philippines. If Marcos falls and U.S . forces are
forced out of the Philippines , in your opinion how will this
impact on Japan's current share of the defense responsibility
for the Pacific Basin?
A: Sorry, I just can't answer your question . For one thing,
the Philippines is outside my area of responsibility .
Secondly , I cannot read the minds of those who are charged with
the answer to the question which you have raised .
0 : I'm not a journalist so this will probably be a couple of
easy ones . At an age when most men would retire as you did
from the U.S . Senate, you decided to become an ambassador , so
I'm kind of curious ...
A: Somebody asked me .
- ll -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Q: ... as to why you did , and when you came over to this part
of the world what has been , if you will , your most interesting
experiences and new revelations?
A: Well , I don ' t think I would have accepted any other
ambassadorial appointment-- my mind wasn ' t running in that
direction . No other appointment except to Japan because I have
had an intense personal interest in this part of the world
since I first came out with the Marines in the twenties and
served as a private in the Philippines and China , mostly in the
Philippines. It ' s an interest which , when the girl who was
later to become my wife became interested in me and found out
that I hadn ' t even finished the eighth grade , she made me go to
school to make up high school units which I lacked because I
had never gone to high school , and then to enter the School of
Mines in Butte, her home town where I was working in the mine~
at the time , as a special student . A year there was enough
because the Mining School was a little bit too tough for me and
I transferred to the University of Missoula , but I concentrated
on history , especially on the history of the Far East, and when
I finished at the university I was taken on as a professor and
I taught Far Eastern history .
When I went to the Congress and the House I was appointed ,
luckily, in my first year to the Foreign Affairs Committee, and
when I went to the Senate I was appointed , again luckily , in my
first year to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee , and in
both those committees my major area of interest was this part
of the world because I was captivated by what I had seen out
her e . I was interested in what was developing . I thought I
could see the potential , and that ' s the reason I came to
Japan . It has been a very i nteresting experience . It has been
difficult at times . I learned a lot . I have done a lot to
learn , but I want to say that I firmly believe in this
relationship, and I want to do what I can to accommodate , to
compromise , to find solutions to our difficulties because not
only does the future of the Pacific Basin depend upon this
relationship but other parts of the world as well . It's too
important to ignore , and we'd better pay attention to it in our
own self interest , and I speak for both countires .
Q: My second question is, that we as member of FCC sincerely
thank you for coming . As you may have noticed there are many
of us who are \vestern and many of us who are Japanese . \ve all
work in communications, and I think for better or for worse we
all enjoy being here or we shoulc'ln' t in fact be here . \Vhat
specific thing would you or could you recommend to us as
international communicators that we can do to assist in
building this relationship?
A: Tell the truth as you know it . That ' s all .
Q: Mr . Ambassador , I would like to ask you a question as a
historian since before you r etired you put out a very wonderfu l
report which became a book and was sold thr ough Tuttle which
- 12 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
became the basis I think of one of your concepts of what is
happening out here. As a historian , listening to you today and
the underlying overtone of what you are saying , if you put it
all together, what is that it is that seeos to concern you -­off
the record? Is it because you are seeing some parallel in
history over the last 10 years which we were battling in terms
of trade, or over the last 50 years , or is it something else?
Could you tell me?
A : What I have been impressed by is the emotions which have
shown themselves at horne and the feeling with which they have
been expressed . I want to see the relations between our two
countries based on equality . I want to see better
understanding develop . I want to see both countries stand up
on their hind legs when they are in the right and express their
point of view, and I want mutual understanding , honest
understanding, to develop on the part of both nations so that
we can arrive at reasonable conclusions to difficulties and get
away from blaming the other fellow for everything and ignoring
what is the responsibility of each of us . There are things we
have to do at home -- better labor-business-governDent
relationship. There are things we have to do at home in the
matter of greater productivity, better quality goods, more
coDpetitive pricing, follow-through servicing . There are
things which the Japanese have to do, I think, in their own
self interest -- open their markets more , reduce or abolish
some of the quotas and tariffs on agricultural products , try
and keep this international trading system which has been so
good to Japan and not at all bad to the United States in
operation because if some degree of order is not maintained
disorder will occur, chaos will result and all of us will be
the losers .
Q : This may be a little outside your line of work . I have
been doing a lot of thinking and a little writing about the
status of women in Japan . You have been following trends in
Japanese society for many more years than I so could you please
share some of your observations about Japanese women?
A: Well , I never interfere in the domestic affairs of another
country . I do think the status of women in Japan is improving ,
and I am sorry that the ERA didn't pass the House yesterday.
Q : Mr . Ambassador , a short question. Just tell me why only a
very small percentage of Manhattan people know the name of our
prime minister .
A: All I can say is that Japan is not only the nation with the
highest longevity but it's also the nation with the highest
literacy rate.
Q: I have been accorded the honor of having the last question
of the evening according to our Program Chairman . As a person
whose job is to read reports from some of the most
authoritative and best informed people in the United States
- 13 -
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.
Government , I would just like to ask you who are the reporters
that you consider to be the best , the most authoritative and
the most understanding on the Far Eastern situation in the
United States media?
A: All of them .
* * *
- 14 -
. '
Mike Mansfield Papers, Series 32, Box 3, Folder 9, Mansfield Library, University of Montana.